Stab yourself in the arm to prove evolution.

[Diogenes' Dog]

The deepest purpose to life, which has so far been the only thing apparent, is life itself. What other deeper purpose do your refer?

Ah, you have moved the goalposts (Q)... I might agree with you that "The deepest purpose to life [...] is life itself.", though that statement is highly ambiguous. However it is different from:

...there is no reason for existence. It just is."

In strictly biological terms, the purpose of life is to continue. However, some would argue (I among them) that human life has purpose other than just biological reproduction. Because we are sentient and reflective beings, there is a meaningful qualitative difference (some say) between e.g. a happy or unhappy life, a tortured or pleasurable life, a moral or immoral life, a passionate or passionless life, a fulfilled or unfulfilled life etc.

A deeper purpose than biological replication might be found therefore by asking "How should man live?". Perhaps the answer for you is still about reproduction?

Both are the non use of reason, just different contexts.

Irrational = Not consistent with or using reason.
Non-rational = Not based on reason. Intuitive: obtained through intuition rather than from reasoning or observation

A justification is irrational if it is inconsistent with reason. e.g. illogical.
Some justifications (e.g. the existence of God) are non-rational i.e. are not based on reason, but use other faculties of the human mind (yes, they do exist!).

Not all phenomena are "objective" and not everything therefore is open to scientific scrutiny.

Name one that doesn't invoke the supernatural.

The quality of a symphony. The memories invoked by the smell of strawberries. How the sky looks to me. What it's like to be a bat. Whether George Bush is sentient. Enough examples?

 

[Godless]

In strictly biological terms, the purpose of life is to continue.

Not true, then suicide would not be an alternative. The purpose of life is to live it by choice, wether one thinks, or lacks the means to think logically does not matter life will take it's corse, the choices we make determine the end outcome of choices made. Some don't continue after making a dredfull mistake, some just end it. BTW I've had now several friends who commited suicide. They were religious.

However, some would argue (I among them) that human life has purpose other than just biological reproduction.

Well of course one can't live by simply f*cking his life away! There's no purpose per say, one lives for happiness, one lives to love others, one lives to produce values that benefit self and others, those who produce greater values live by better means than those who don't, some live off the efforts of others, "theist leaders" & "politicians" some live with a sense of purpose, but there's no purpose desing without reproduction if the specie is to continue, though that effort has to be made by personal choice or not. Biologically a living organism strives for reproduction to continue the specie. We are no different.

This probably why when there's war, there's an increase in child birth.

You assert a belief as ardently as any fundementalist. How do you know with such certainty that there is no deeper purpose for your life? Or have you simply closed your mind to the possibility?

The only purpose of my life is that one that I set out to do, there's nothing deeper than doing what the hell I want, and no my mind is not closed, it just doesn't accept mystical bull shit.

Like many atheists, I think you confuse "non-rational" with "irrational". Not all phenomena are "objective" and not everything therefore is open to scientific scrutiny.

*1. nonrational - not based on reason; "there is a great deal that is nonrational in modern culture"
irrational - not consistent with or using reason; "irrational fears"; "irrational animals"
2. nonrational - obtained through intuition rather than from reasoning or observation
intuitive, visceral
illogical, unlogical - lacking in correct logical relation*http://www.thefreedictionary.com/nonrational

I think the above explains it rather well don't it?

All phenomena can be objectively understood, one only has to set aside the mystic bs that exist within. Because it is not known today, means not that it will not be known of tomorow. Eventually we learn, we adapt and move on. Atheist have, I wonder when theist will.

Godless

 

[Diogenes' Dog]

In strictly biological terms, the purpose of life is to continue.

Not true, then suicide would not be an alternative.

Biologically a living organism strives for reproduction to continue the specie. We are no different.

I think we agree in statements 1 & 3, (though Richard Dawkins might not agree that it is the species that we are striving to continue - I therefore used the term "life"). That humans commit suicide is an argument for our having a "deeper purpose" than mere biological reproduction, (unless they had always already reproduced - which is not bourne out by the statistics).

I am sorry to hear you had friends who killed themselves.

All phenomena can be objectively understood, one only has to set aside the mystic bs that exist within. Because it is not known today, means not that it will not be known of tomorow. Eventually we learn, we adapt and move on. Atheist have, I wonder when theist will.

Not all phenomena are objective - some are subjective, and not everything is subject to scientific scrutiny. I include a long list in my last post. Not every hypothesis is testable either, and therefore many things will forever remain conjecture. The best we do in science is make better models that conform increasingly well to reality.

The "purpose of living" is one such question that is not amenable to scientific scrutiny. It is a non-rational problem. By the way, we can agree the definitions of non-rational...

1. nonrational - not based on reason; "there is a great deal that is nonrational in modern culture"
2. nonrational - obtained through intuition rather than from reasoning or observation.

...except where you muddied the waters by including synonyms such as intuitive, visceral and "related words" such as irrational, illogical etc. which do not form part of the definition.

 

[(Q)]

Ah, you have moved the goalposts (Q)... I might agree with you that "The deepest purpose to life [...] is life itself.", though that statement is highly ambiguous.

I've done no such thing, the goalposts haven't moved. How can that statement be even remotely ambiguous? It is self-explanatory with no wiggle room.

In strictly biological terms, the purpose of life is to continue.

I'm not talking abut simple subsistence, I'm talking about existence with purpose.

However, some would argue (I among them) that human life has purpose other than just biological reproduction. Because we are sentient and reflective beings, there is a meaningful qualitative difference (some say) between e.g. a happy or unhappy life, a tortured or pleasurable life, a moral or immoral life, a passionate or passionless life, a fulfilled or unfulfilled life etc.

The fact that we want to believe in a higher purpose does not mean one exists. It's merely our want to believe in such things and the fact we have the ability to imagine such things. So what?

A deeper purpose than biological replication might be found therefore by asking "How should man live?". Perhaps the answer for you is still about reproduction?

No, its embedded in sociological interactions. As sentient beings with the ability to reason, we should easily come the conclusion that we should not do harm to others, for example.

The quality of a symphony. The memories invoked by the smell of strawberries. How the sky looks to me. What it's like to be a bat. Whether George Bush is sentient. Enough examples?

All of those are open to scientific scrutiny, perhaps not with our current technologies, but open nonetheless.

Of course, to find out what it's like to be a bat is not really a phenomenon, is it? That would most likely require the supernatural.

Do you have at least one that isn't?

 

[superluminal]

I am an a-theist.

I love a cool spring breeze while the warm sun washes over me.

I love to help people because it makes me, and them, feel good.

I love to go camping with my family.

I love to explore the universe through astronomy and physics because I get intense pleasure from learning and discovery.

I love the sense of deep mystery that comes withy contemplating the cosmos.

I love to swim in the ocean and feel the life enveloping me.

I love the interesting/frustrating/downright stupid conversations on sciforums.

I love figuring things out, especially after having a misconception about them - the WOW NOW I GET IT experience.

I love the idea that someday, us "sentients" will learn to coexist in peace so that every creature can be completely free to explore the universe in his/her/its own way.

In a nutshell, what more could anyone ask of a life? Why would anyone constrain themselves to some arbitrary "religious" outlook when the universe reveals itself if you only look? Why live for a fantasy when reality is so friggin rewarding?

Peace.

 

[Diogenes' Dog]

I am an a-theist.
I love a cool spring breeze while the warm sun washes over me.
I love to help people because it makes me, and them, feel good.
I love to go camping with my family.
I love to explore the universe through astronomy and physics because I get intense pleasure from learning and discovery.
I love the sense of deep mystery that comes withy contemplating the cosmos.
I love to swim in the ocean and feel the life enveloping me.
I love the interesting/frustrating/downright stupid conversations on sciforums.
I love figuring things out, especially after having a misconception about them - the WOW NOW I GET IT experience.
I love the idea that someday, us "sentients" will learn to coexist in peace so that every creature can be completely free to explore the universe in his/her/its own way.

In a nutshell, what more could anyone ask of a life? Why would anyone constrain themselves to some arbitrary "religious" outlook when the universe reveals itself if you only look? Why live for a fantasy when reality is so friggin rewarding?

Peace.

Sounds like you love life, including the "mystery of the cosmos" superluminal. That is very close to the heart of theism (I include Buddhism too, though there is no God in Buddhism). The only difference is theists (some theists) are reaching into that mystery to find the essence of that love, joy, peace etc. It is a risk because it may be a fantasy, but then Columbus took a risk when he set sail West, not knowing what was beyond the edge of the known (Old) World.

 

[(Q)]

Sounds like you love life, including the "mystery of the cosmos" superluminal. That is very close to the heart of theism (I include Buddhism too, though there is no God in Buddhism).

No, theists already know there are no mysteries to the cosmos, as their god created all things, including the cosmos. Big difference.

The only difference is theists (some theists) are reaching into that mystery to find the essence of that love, joy, peace etc.

Again no, theists are reaching to their gods. They could care less as to what actually makes the universe go round.

It is a risk because it may be a fantasy, but then Columbus took a risk when he set sail West, not knowing what was beyond the edge of the known (Old) World.

You can't compare the supernatural to reality.

 

[Godless]

Q we should call you a sledge hammer Smash those silly notions of mysticism.

Good work; btw.

Godless

 

[Diogenes' Dog]

No, theists already know there are no mysteries to the cosmos, as their god created all things, including the cosmos. Big difference.

Again no, theists are reaching to their gods. They could care less as to what actually makes the universe go round.

You have a strange & distorted notion of theism Q. Non-dogmatic theism is a belief in an ultimate mystery, an ultimate intelligence - incomprehensible by thought, but within reach of anyone. Science (yes - I am a scientist) is a not dissimilar project, in trying to explore, observe, map and build models of physical reality. The two are not contradictory - both are a search for a different kind of truth.

It is dogmatism that robs the cosmos of mysteries. That can be religious dogmatism, or reductionist dogmatism. Science (partially) liberated us from the former, but who will liberate us from the latter? My objection to your views is not their atheism (which I respect), but their lack of skepticism i.e. their dogmatism.

You can't compare the supernatural to reality.

Why not? Because the supernatural may not exist, and is beyond the edge of the world we know?

Q we should call you a sledge hammer Smash those silly notions of mysticism.

Hmm, you sound just like a religious fanatic Godless!

P.S. You may like to read "The End of Science" by Richard Horgan who was editor of Scientific American (and is an atheist). His thesis is that science is slowing as it is nearing the limits of possible investigation. He conjectures it will become increasingly "ironic" i.e. hypotheses will be increasingly untestable.

 

[davewhite04]

Ok take a pin and stick it in your top facing lower arm, now twist your arm around and stab yourself on the other side.

Ok, the top of the arm will hurt very little as the skin is thick but on the other side of the arm you will experiance much greater pain.

It's clear that the reason for this thicker skin is to protect the outer facing arm from damage. As the outer side of the arm is much more susceptible to injury, we have evolved a thicker skin to protect us.

If we had been created by a designer surely he would have made the underside of the arm with the same thickness of skin? It would make for a much better and safer design than evolution could manage, yet it has not been done.

Surely the most intelligent designer in the universe would have made this 'very simple' design change for our benefit if he existed?

What condition are your lower arms in?

 

[Diogenes' Dog]

If we had been created by a designer surely he would have made the underside of the arm with the same thickness of skin? It would make for a much better and safer design than evolution could manage, yet it has not been done.

Surely the most intelligent designer in the universe would have made this 'very simple' design change for our benefit if he existed?

This seems a very stange example, alexb123? You could point to the appendix, coccyx, enzymes of the (redundant) vitamin C synthetic pathway, (most of which we still carry), or any number of vestigial or redundant features of us and other organisms as better evidence for evolution over design.

We may have thinner skin on the inside of our arms because it's useful to have them more sensitive to touch, texture & temperature. Both a designer and evolution would share a direction on this - to make us fit for purpose. It's just that a designer would presumably be less wasteful and leave the redundant bits off.

 

[cole grey]

What if the designer did not want humanity to go around living in a black and white world where every idea was reducible to 2+2=4?
Perhaps the designer would use a process which appears "natural" to allow for discussion. What does the word "natural" even mean? It doesn't preclude a system designer any more than it assumes one.

In a dogmatic theist's view, where every unbeliever is sent immediately to hell, this confusion is a horrible thing. In hinduism though, for example, the game is the whole essence of this plane of existence, so it isn't as subject to our value judgments.

 

[(Q)]

You have a strange & distorted notion of theism Q.

My view of theism consists of nothing more than the scriptures I've read and that which has been shown to me by other theists.

Personally, I have no concept of theism.

Non-dogmatic theism is a belief in an ultimate mystery, an ultimate intelligence - incomprehensible by thought, but within reach of anyone.

Is that a new religion?

Science (yes - I am a scientist) is a not dissimilar project, in trying to explore, observe, map and build models of physical reality. The two are not contradictory - both are a search for a different kind of truth.

How many different kinds of truth do you propose?

It is dogmatism that robs the cosmos of mysteries. That can be religious dogmatism, or reductionist dogmatism. Science (partially) liberated us from the former, but who will liberate us from the latter? My objection to your views is not their atheism (which I respect), but their lack of skepticism i.e. their dogmatism.

Sorry, but you'll have to do better than just invoke reductionist dogmatism.

Why not? Because the supernatural may not exist, and is beyond the edge of the world we know?

Can you show the supernatural exists?

 

[alexb123]

This seems a very stange example, alexb123? You could point to the appendix, coccyx, enzymes of the (redundant) vitamin C synthetic pathway, (most of which we still carry), or any number of vestigial or redundant features of us and other organisms as better evidence for evolution over design.

We may have thinner skin on the inside of our arms because it's useful to have them more sensitive to touch, texture & temperature. Both a designer and evolution would share a direction on this - to make us fit for purpose. It's just that a designer would presumably be less wasteful and leave the redundant bits off.

Why would a designer need to make the inner arm sensitive to touch, texture or temperature, when our greatest tool for all these jobs sits at the end of the arm. Our hands cover all of these roles to a level not seen anywhere else in the body. When you already have a job covered so well by something so close by, I don't think your argument seems logical.

 

[cole grey]

alexb,
just admit it, your thin skin argument sucks.
You ignored the question about having thick skin on the sex organs. Are we supposed to accomplish all sexual contact with our hands, since they are so well developed for sensation?
Give it up, it's ok, nobody's perfect.

 

[alexb123]

alexb,
just admit it, your thin skin argument sucks.
You ignored the question about having thick skin on the sex organs. Are we supposed to accomplish all sexual contact with our hands, since they are so well developed for sensation?
Give it up, it's ok, nobody's perfect.

Please stop hiding your bad arguments by insulting mine. I do not claim to be correct here I am open-minded as to my accuracy but so far I am un-shifted in my belief. And lets face the FACTS here we will never really know who is correct it’s all a matter of opinion. Let’s just debate the issue and not resort to attacks of any nature.

 

[EmptyForceOfChi]

firstly i dont see how evolution expells the notion/philosophy of a "god" it just dissproves the bible and holy books,

wich do not represent the true philosophy of a god that created the known universe,

we all know the bible was written by man, and its only a storybook, no need to let a storybook taint the true philosophy of a god like bieng.




anyway,


i practice certain shaolin iron methods, and muay thai conditioning, i have made nearly my entire body thicker skinned, the inside of my arms are just as durable as my forearm fronts. hit them against a rough tree trunk for 1 hour per day for a few years, and it will get alot thicker and stronger.


by using shaolin iron methods, and other conditioning you can do some amazing things with your body, and make it a great deal tougher/stronger than the average mans, even the huge muscle guys you see on mr universe etc are pretty weak on the outside, its like "injected muscle" if i were to punch one of those guys in the arm or chest muscle full power, they would cry like babies, to condition your muscles skin bones etc is needed i think, (if you are in need of strength), alot of big guys are still pretty fragile, and only really can dish out hits, rather than take them,



shaolin iron methods of training are amazing, try them out if your serious about martial arts, (if you are only going to try it once and never again i say dont bother, it will do more harm than good),


consistent or not atall.



peace.

 

[Diogenes' Dog]

Why would a designer need to make the inner arm sensitive to touch, texture or temperature, when our greatest tool for all these jobs sits at the end of the arm. Our hands cover all of these roles to a level not seen anywhere else in the body. When you already have a job covered so well by something so close by, I don't think your argument seems logical.

I do want more sensation than just on my hands (e.g. Cole Grey's sex organs objection). The inner arm is in fact much more sensitive to temperature than our hands.

I think you have come up with an interesting thought experiment as to what improvements one would suggest to a future human genetic design team. e.g. endogenous :m: anyone? Only kidding!

 

[Godless]

Hmm, you sound just like a religious fanatic Godless!

Thanks for the morning joke


Like emptyforceofchi says, evolution would not disprove a god, no matter what evolution may do in our future, or how we may see design flaws, a theist will never accept that evolution has eradicated their beloved farie in the sky, they will give circular arguments til the end of times, have been for 2500 years, will be for the next two milliniums. Yep! they will still be waiting for their savior to come, in the year 2020 and 3020 they will still have excuses why the damn dood hasn't shown up!.

Godless

 

[Diogenes' Dog]

Thanks for the morning joke


Like emptyforceofchi says, evolution would not disprove a god, no matter what evolution may do in our future, or how we may see design flaws, a theist will never accept that evolution has eradicated their beloved farie in the sky, they will give circular arguments til the end of times, have been for 2500 years, will be for the next two milliniums. Yep! they will still be waiting for their savior to come, in the year 2020 and 3020 they will still have excuses why the damn dood hasn't shown up!.

Godless

Do you have any other records Godless? You do sound angry. I hope you can forgive whatever religion did to your friends. There are f*cked up religions about like there are f*cked up people. Shouldn't condemn them all indescriminately though, otherwise you miss out on the good ones.

In fact I just got a message from God: By special arrangement he's here and waiting to listen to your complaints - you don't have to wait until 3020!